Good Enough Is Good, Indeed

You can’t always get what you want, but you can get close enough.

That was the thinking expressed last week by a Tarzana businessman about amendments to a plan governing land use along the San Fernando Valley’s Ventura Boulevard. It’s a a surprisingly simple philosophy, really, but one that’s in too short supply around here.

The Ventura / Cahuenga Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan was adopted by the Los Angeles City Council in 1991 to direct growth along the 17-mile boulevard that runs from Studio City to Woodland Hills. But a fledgling economy stalled the plan almost as soon as it was adopted. A dispute over fees levied on business owners and developers (based, it turned out, on mistaken figures) took five years to straighten out. By then the plan needed to be amended to correct oversights and reflect changes. Last year, city planners initiated another round of public hearings to update the plan.

The process, although frustratingly slow, is a worthwhile effort. It aims to create community support for a “main street” through the Valley that gives this far-flung community a sense of place and connection. Among other provisions, the plan calls for planting more trees along the boulevard and encourages pedestrian areas by discouraging the building of new drive-thru and other car-dependent businesses.

But where planners envisioned Old Town Pasadena and Santa Monica’s Third Street Promenade, some boulevard business owners saw empty storefronts if the plan’s restrictions on the types of retail allowed kept them from finding tenants. Business owners in Tarzana, like Short, turned to City Council members Hal Bernson and Cindy Miscikowski to work out a compromise.

What a concept--compromise! Too many times opponents on either side of an issue dig in their heels and refuse to talk, much less compromise. And consequently, conflicts go unresolved for years, if not decades.

But planners, council members, business owners and residents came up with an expanded list of allowable retail businesses that all sides agreed they could live with. As Short told a Times reporter, “You never get everything you want, but we got enough modifications to at least be satisfied.”

The updated plan was approved unanimously last week by the council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee. It now goes before the full council with a rare and exemplary recommendation: It’s good enough.